RAVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel Shri Girish B. Baladare for the appellants / accused who is appearing through video conferencing and so also learned HCGP for Respondent No.1 who is present before court physically.

(2.) In this appeal, though notice has been duly served on Respondent No.2 / Mahesh M.E as contemplated under Chapter IV-A of Section 15A (5) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, he has not participated in the proceedings. However, learned HCGP for Respondent No.1 in this matter, has taken care of the contentions as well as the allegations made in the complaint filed by Respondent No.2 / Mahesh M.E. who is the victim in the aforesaid crime.

(3.) This appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the Special Court namely the I Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crl.Misc.No.207/2021 dated 26.03.2021. The appellants / accused had filed a petition before the Special Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail. But there is an express bar under Section 18A of the SC & ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 to entertain the bail petition filed by the accused. Therefore, the Special Court had not granted the relief of bail and did not even entertain the petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. On that premise, the petition filed by the appellants / accused in Crl.Misc.No.207/2021 came to be dismissed by the Trial Court by its order dated 26.03.2021.